howto build firefox package for development?

[Mike Hommey]

On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 01:15:00AM -0400, Eric Dorland <eric at debian.org> wrote:
> * Alexander Sack (asac at debian.org) wrote:
> > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:45:41PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (mh at glandium.org) wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:21:33PM +0200, Alexander Sack
> > > > <asac at debian.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 10:06:05AM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > > > > > * Alexander Sack (asac at debian.org) wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > While working on security issues for firefox 1.5.0.3 I ran into
> > > > > > > troubles to build firefox a second time without rebuilding source
> > > > > > > tree from diff and orig. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > In fact building the diff.gz after running clean fails because
> > > > > > > there are links which are not representable in diff.gz.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > What's the right way to build and rebuild firefox from sid?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Upstream's clean target is really quite broken. If you do a build
> > > > > > and then a clean you're not going to be able to rebuild. I've meant
> > > > > > to look at this one for a while but have never gotten around to it.
> > > > > > Patches welcome. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > when have you first seen this regression? 1.5 ... or even before?  Are
> > > > > you sure that its upstreams related?
> > > > 
> > > > It's always been this way and gets better sometimes, especially when you
> > > > send patches upstream, which i did recently. I'll have to check on which
> > > > branch(es) they landed the patch. The patch was for xulrunner, but most
> > > > of it applies to firefox. I'm not sure I've applied it yet to our
> > > > firefox.
> > > 
> > > I don't remember you applying said patch. Please do. Don't save all
> > > the goodness for xulrunner :P
> > > 
> > 
> > BTW, is the firefox svn public?
> 
> It's not. Because firefox is such a large package, my feeling was
> having the repository distant would making working on it more painful
> for me. I'd have no problem mirroring it somewhere (although I have a
> somewhat unconventional svn layout), and eventually I'll move to a
> better, more distributed revision control system. 

It's just fine with svk ;)

Mike